臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

自1992年Kaplan與Norton合作發展出平衡計分卡以來，受到企業界廣泛地引用，然諸多的企業在推動平衡計分卡的過程中，出現了一些執行面上的問題，由於企業的因果關係複雜，常有某部門的績效並非某部門所能控制的現象，因此績效制度並不一定能有效的發揮改善之作用；例如某些企業只將平衡計分卡當作績效評估的工具，雖然設定了各部門的關鍵績效指標KPI，但卻忽略了部門關鍵績效指標與整體企業策略間之間的連動性，導致部門的目標雖然都達成了，但是企業的整體營運績效並沒有相對獲得提升及改善。於是Kaplan與Norton 提出了策略地圖的重要性，將企業策略的運用從平衡計分卡四個構面中所選出的目標、項目間的關係，做了的較清楚描述，是謂「策略地圖」。然而完善的策略地圖，縱然可以使平衡計分卡從績效評量工具轉化為策略執行工具，讓企業策略成為具體的指標與行動，然而這二項工具均缺乏動態的方法，及其並無法對於策略目標和績效指標間的關係進行模擬及分析。因此如果能透過系統動力學這樣的一個動態的、能修改檢討及進行模擬分析的方法及工具，在策略地圖及目標規劃中，展開平衡計分卡的衡量項目，藉此建構出基本模型及修正行動和目標的架構，並隨著模擬的時空及外在環境因素的變化，分析檢討成果，再以假設某些情境的變化，進行多次測試模擬，以了解所制定的策略規劃目標可能造成之結果，用以擬定因應措施及行動，可做為企業組織在執行策略目標及績效評估時的依據。
本研究之目的是希望藉由本研究及對個案公司的分析模擬，協助企業在描繪策略地圖及設定與執行平衡計分卡時，能更明確有效的找出策略的關鍵因素，並進行整體系統式的思考，配合系統動力學建模方法，對策略及企業系統進行模擬，藉以修正各項策略及KPI值，擬定適合組織發展的關鍵績效指標，以期彌補策略地圖對動態回饋環路影響不足之處，並可藉此訂定完整之績效衡量指標，也期望能於執行時，藉由領先指標的及適時的行動修正，找尋最適之績效指標及策略，進一步提升企業整體營運績效與競爭力。

More and more organizations and enterprises adopt the Strategy Map and Balanced Scorecard(BSC). However, did they really reach their strategy goal or do they have a mature method to assess their performances? When they finish contructing their strategy map and lauching the balanced scorecard, they may face the same problems, such as how to sucessfully implement strategy? How to effectively set up KPI? How to apply the limited resources into the most important strategy? Some researches mention that there is no interactive relationship among BSC, Strategy goal, Performance Indicators, and the actions they took. That is the limit of the current BSC theory. However, it do exists the complicated dynamics relation between the BSC strategy actions and the internal process of organization. Most of the top management only pay attention to the short-term performance and neglect the side effect and unintended consequences caused by the improper actions they took. They even misjudge the feedback information from the wrong messages because of the system delay. Therefore, the whole strategy planning turn out to be imperfect and the effectiveness of promoting strategy goal is not so good as they expected. But if they incorporate the system dynamics method into BSC, then it may resolve the dynamic and complex issue that happen in their system. The purpose of this study is toresearch and find out the interactive mechanism and method between strategy goal and performance measurement for the enterprises. According to the causal relationship found in the process of establishing the strategy map and examining its various measuring items, construct the system dynamics model and analyze the simulation outcomes. And then find out the driving factors to succeed and the Key Indicators for achieving the strategic goal. In this way, two objectives could be accomplished:

(1) Launch and develop the strategy map and Balanced Scorecard, and then utilize the system dynamics to conduct the planning, simulation and test.
(2) Through this interactive simulation and test between performance indicators and strategy goal, look for the best key performance indicators and revise the policy actions and strategy.
System dynamics is the main approach adopted in this study. By following its modeling procedure, I undertook the data collecting and analyzing for the target company as my case study. And then, conducted the construction, simulation, test, and analysis of system dynamic model. According to the results, I made the conclusions of this study as follows:
(1) Within the causal relationship between the strategy goal and performance measurement items of the BSC, there do exists an influence of side effect and unintended consequences. (2) The simulation outcomes of this system dynamics model could be taken as reference for planning and adjusting the strategy goal of BSC, and also could be the basis of finding out the leading index of the system. (3) Conclude and set up the basic system dynamics model for Balanced Scorecard. Trough this study, we hope that enterprises could adopt the system dynamic to help them improve their long- term integral effectiveness. At last, this study brings up the suggestions and proposes some idea for follow-up research.

中文摘要………………………………………………………………………………………i
Abstract…………………………………………………………………………………….….ii
Acknowledgement…………………………………………………………………………….iv
Contents………………………………………………………………………………………..v
Table List……………………………………………………………………………………...vi
Figure List…………………………………………………………………………………….vi
Chapter 1 Introduction 1
1.1 Research and Motivation 1
1.2 Research Purpose 3
1.3 Research Flow and Framework 4
1.4 Research Scope and Limitations 6
Chapter 2 Literatures Review 7
2.1 System Dynamics 7
2.2 Corporation Strategies and Performance Evaluation 14
2.3 Balance Scorecard 16
2.4 Strategic Map 20
2.5 GOCO 22
2.6 Airplane Fleet Maintenance Management 24
Chapter 3 Construct Strategy Map & Balanced Scorecard 25
3.1 The process of planning and measuring on the dynamic corporate strategic goal 25
3.2 Constructing Strategy Map and Balanced Scorecard 27
3.3 Construction, test, analysis, and adjustment of the Basic System Dynamics Model 29
Chapter 4 Case Study – AIDC Commercialized Maintenance Program 36
4.1 Introduction of the Target Company 36
4.2 Data Collecting, Sorting, and Applying 39
4.3 Target Company Balanced Scorecard Development & System Dynamic Model 44
4.4 System Dynamics Model of the Target Company with Feedback Loop 54
4.5 Model Validation and Verification 64
Chapter 5 Conclusions and Suggestions 70
5.1 Research Discoveries and Conclusions 70
5.2 Contribution to Managerial Practice 72
5.3 Research Constraints and Follow-up proposition 73
5.3 Research Constraints and Follow-up proposition 73
References 74
Appendix: Data Source 76
Table List
Table 4.1 Correlation of Reliability To Readiness…………..…………………….…………41
Table 4.2 Correlation of Usage Rate To Total Maintenance Hours………………………….42
Table 4.3 Correlation of Mission Effect To Usage Rate……………………………………..43
Table 4.4 Balanced Scorecard of the Target Company………………………………………44
Table 4.5 Extreme Condition Tests...……………………………..………………………….66

Figure List
Figure 1.1 Research Flow……………………………………………………………………. 5
Figure 2.1 Sterman’s Modeling Process………………………………………………..……11
Figure 2.2 Forrester’s Modeling Procedure……………………………………………..…...12
Figure 2.3 Integrated Modeling Procedure….….…………………………………………....13
Figure 2.4 The Structure of transforming Strategy to Operation from BSC………………...17
Figure 2.5 Kaplan & Norton’s Strategy Map…………………………………………….….20
Figure 3.1 The Procedure of enterprise’s Strategic Goals Planning & Measurement………26
Figure 3.2 Organization Value Creating Process…………………………………………....27
Figure 3.3 dynamic behavior mode -Goal Seeking………………………………………….31
Figure 3.4 The Reference Model of Performance Measurement and Policy Action………..32
Figure 3.5 The Basic Wire Flow for the Four Perspectives of BSC…………………….…..33
Figure 4.1 Commercialized Maintenance Program Organization Chart…………………....38
Figure 4.2 Management Objective Values of the Target Company…………………….…..39
Figure 4.3 Intuitive Strategy Map of the Target Company………………………..………..45
Figure 4.4 Intuitive System Dynamics Model of the Target Company / Wire Flow……….46
Figure 4.5 Outcome Plot of 6 Indices for Intuitive Model of the Target Company………..53
Figure 4.6 Outcome Plot of 3 Indices for Intuitive Model of the Target Company………..53
Figure 4.7 Strategy Map of the Target Company with Feedback Loop……………………54
Figure 4.8 Causal Feedback Loop Diagram for the Model of the Target Company……….55
Figure 4.9 Flow Wire Diagram of the Model of the Target Company with Causal Feedback Loop…………………………………………………………………………………………56
Figure 4.10 Outcome Plot of 6 Indices for the model with causal feedback loop………….63
Figure 4.11 Outcome Plot of 4 Indices for the model with causal feedback loop………….63
Figure 4.12 Outcome Plot of 6 Indices for the model in Steady State test…………………66
Figure4.13 Outcome Plot of 6 Indices for the model in Steady State test………………….67
Figure 4.14 Outcome Plot of 6 Indices for the model in Reverse Policy test………………68
Figure 4.15 Outcome Plot of 6 Indices for the model in Prolong Period test………………69

Forrester, Jay. W., 1961, Industrial Dynamics, The MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass, USA.

Forrester, Jay W., 1994, System dynamics, System thinking, and Soft OR System
Dynamics Review

Forrester, Jay W., 1968, Market Growth as Influenced by Capital Investment, Industrial Management Review, (currently Sloan Management Review), l9 (2), (Winter), 83-105. Also reprinted in Roberts, 1978.

Forrester, Jay W., 1971, Counterintuitive Behavior of Social Systems, Technology
Review, 73(3), also in Collected Papers of Jay W. Forrester, 1975, The MIT
Press, Cambridge, Mass, USA.

Huang, Chao-jen, A study on Interaction mechanism between BSC strategy goal and Performance Index, NSYSY, 2005

Kaplan, Robert S., and Norton, David P. 1996a. The Balanced Scorecard：Translating Strategic Into Action. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, Massachusetts.

Kaplan, Robert S., and Norton, David P. 2000. The Strategy Focused organization, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, Massachusetts.

Kaplan, Robert S., and Norton, David P. 2003. Strategy Maps: Converting Intangible Assets Into Tangible Outcomes, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, Massachusetts.

Lyneis, James M. 1980,Corporate Planning and Policy Design: A System Dynamics Approach

Nørreklit, H., 2000, The Balance on the Balanced Scorecard- A Critical Analysis of Some of Its Assumptions, Management Accounting Research, 11, 65-88.
Olve, N., J. Roy and M. Wetter, 1999, Performance Drivers: A Practical Guild to Using the Balanced Scorecard, John Wiley & Sons Ltd., England.

Schoeneborn, Frank, 2003, Linking Balanced Scorecard to System Dynamics,
International System Dynamics Conference.

Senge, M. Peter, 1990,The Fifth Discipline-The Art and Practice of the Learning
Organization.

Simons, R. 1995. Levers of Control：How Managers Use Innovative Control System to Drive Strategic Renewal. Harvard Business School Press

Sterman, J.,2000 Business Dynamics: Systems Thinking and Modeling for a Complex World. Irwin/McGraw Hill.

Wolstenholme, E., 1990, System Enquiry: A System Dynamics Approach, England: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Wolstenholme, E., 1998, Balanced Strategies for Balanced Scorecards: The Role of System Dynamics in Supporting Balanced Scorecard and Value Based
Management, full paper on CD-ROM Proceeding of 1998 International
System Dynamics Conference, Quebec, Canada